"We Must Affirm that the Papacy is the Anti-Christ"

[bcm6987]

Can you point to a statement by the “Holy Father” that has called all Protestants heretics?

Good try Triune Unity, but no dice. The Holy Father has not needed to declare all protestants heretics per se. He has done so by declaring beliefs held by protestants (all the solas, for example) to be heretical beliefs. If one subscribes to these heretical beliefs then one must be a heretic. Good thing our Holy Father is led infallibly by the Holy Spirit, just as Jesus promised us, or else these heretical beliefs may have made their way into Christianity!

 

[ralphinal]

Did I miss it when Rome said that those born into Protestant churches or those that are Protestant through no fault of their own are not guilty of heresy?

 

[quiet52]

Okay…now I know this will rile many people up, so let us try and maintain a charitable spirit, but…

…I was very surprised to come across this article on a Lutheran blog which affirmed the necessity of considering the Papacy to be the anti-Christ predicted in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2.

The author says this for several reasons, 1. being the degree of authority the Papacy claims for itself, and 2. being the Catholic denial of the “true gospel”: faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone. Why am I posting this? This article just really frustrated me and I thought our dialouge with the Lutherans was beyond this.

Oy, how language, stubbornness, ignorance, and lack of charity can keep us Christians divided!

Just as an individual Catholic can form an opinion contrary to the teaching of the Church, so can Lutherans form an opinions which are contrary to Lutheran teachings. That Lutheran blogger seems to have only a sketchy idea of what both Catholicism and Lutheranism are about, was expressing an unsupported opinion – and seems completely oblivious to the fact that in the spirit of ecumenism, the Catholic Church has been reaching out these past few decades to develop a better awareness and acknowledgement of what truths of faith we do share.

In 1999, the Vatican and the Lutheran World Federation co-signed the “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification”:

“By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping us and calling us to good works.”

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

Since then, the Methodists have signed off on it:

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0604186.htm

We are taught in the scriptures that we are saved by God’s grace alone – but that His Holy Spirit enables us to act on His graces through faith, hope and charity. In other words, we’re given the grace to cooperate with what God endows us with, in order to be saved. We must act in faith – and Scripture repeatedly teaches about obedient faith – not a passive faith.

The opposite of faith is disobedience:

“Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him.” (John 3:36)

In other words, faith requires “works” – obedience to God’s laws of LOVE.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Okay…now I know this will rile many people up, so let us try and maintain a charitable spirit, but…

cyberbrethren.typepad.com/cyberbrethren/2008/07/the-papacy-is-the-antichrist-the-continuing-necessity-and-validity-of-this-lutheran-confession.html

…I was very surprised to come across this article on a Lutheran blog which affirmed the necessity of considering the Papacy to be the anti-Christ predicted in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2.

The author says this for several reasons, 1. being the degree of authority the Papacy claims for itself, and 2. being the Catholic denial of the “true gospel”: faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone.

Personally, I discovered that, what I thought was just anti-Protestant CAF rhetoric (there are some posters we must really take with a grain of salt!) turned out to be true! Luther really did desire to dispose of the Epistle of James, and actually penned in the word “alone” after faith in Romans.

How can Lutherans not stop and pause at that fact?

No matter how we spin it, James says “faith without works is dead”. Clearly a dead faith is still a faith, as a dead body is still a body. Clearly dead faith does not save…how can Lutherans deny that there are conditions which prevent faith from being salvific!?

Why am I posting this? This article just really frustrated me and I thought our dialouge with the Lutherans was beyond this.

I dont get it? Lutherans come on the scene 1600 years after Catholicism, protested the Catholic faith, took her bible, removed 7 canonized books, added a word to the book of Romans changing the original meaning of God’s word.

Then makes itself to be a prophet of God by; predicting the Pope to be an anti-christ using the same bible that the Catholic church canonized.

So Lutherans dont accept Jesus teachings that he has built his church on Peter present day Pope, gave the keys to the kingdom of heaven to the Pope, gave the Pope and successors of the apostles the power to baptize, forgive sins, preach and teach the gospel of Jesus to all nations. Yet 1600 centuries later protest the body of Jesus Christ, and believes Peter’s Chair is the antichrist?

I dont get it? Lutherans make Peter’s chair antichrist, when it was Peter and the successors of the apostles who brought the gospel to the 16th century paid by the blood of Jesus and the apostles successors in the Pope’s and bishops of the Catholic faith. Is this not a double standard, and a denial of Jesus Christ himself. Would this Protestant movement,seperation from the apostolic Catholic church be considered antiChrist, if not anti Christian?

Those who follow the True gospel of Jesus Christ understand that even Jesus himself was called a glutton who shared meals with sinners, why would the servant in the garden of the Lord his Pope be excluded from such ridicule and persecution. If Lutherans sentiments about the Pope have any Truth to them? Lutherans bring about Jesus teachings, when he told the apostles, if they persecuted me, they will persecute you also; So Lutherans teachings do have some truth to them, because they bring about the persecutions that Jesus foretold his body (Catholic church) would undergo, including a brother will turn against his own brother;

 

[Dauphin]

Did I miss it when Rome said that those born into Protestant churches or those that are Protestant through no fault of their own are not guilty of heresy?

They’re not assumed to be guilty of heresy. An act of will is necessary for sin, and being born a protestant does not involve the will.

Any Protestant who has rejected any article of Catholic doctrine is a heretic.

 

[ralphinal]

They’re not assumed to be guilty of heresy. An act of will is necessary for sin, and being born a protestant does not involve the will.

Any Protestant who has rejected any article of Catholic doctrine is a heretic.

And what constitutes this rejection? At what point should someone be expected to know and accept it?

Not to get difficult, but what per centage of CAtholics are heretics?

 

[Dauphin]

And what constitutes this rejection? At what point should someone be expected to know and accept it?

The only circumstances under which one is not expected to know Catholic doctrine is if one is in a state of invincible ignorance.

If the ignorance is only vincible, then the person will be damned if he does not come to know and accept the Catholic faith. The formal rejection called heresy is not necessary for damnation. Ignorance isn’t a ticket to heaven.

Not to get difficult, but what per centage of CAtholics are heretics?

The vast majority, I’d expect.

 

[Peter_J]

Okay…now I know this will rile many people up, so let us try and maintain a charitable spirit, but…

cyberbrethren.typepad.com/cyberbrethren/2008/07/the-papacy-is-the-antichrist-the-continuing-necessity-and-validity-of-this-lutheran-confession.html

…I was very surprised to come across this article on a Lutheran blog which affirmed the necessity of considering the Papacy to be the anti-Christ predicted in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2.

So why is that surprising? You can also find Catholic blog that claim that all non-Catholics are going to hell.

The author says this for several reasons, 1. being the degree of authority the Papacy claims for itself, and 2. being the Catholic denial of the “true gospel”: faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone.

Personally, I discovered that, what I thought was just anti-Protestant CAF rhetoric (there are some posters we must really take with a grain of salt!) turned out to be true! Luther really did desire to dispose of the Epistle of James, and actually penned in the word “alone” after faith in Romans.

How can Lutherans not stop and pause at that fact?

I basically agree with you, being a Catholic myself; but lest we be unfair to the Lutherans, I would point out that Catholics added the word “filioque” to the Creed – and haven’t removed it. (I know you’ll say that’s different because the “filioque” addition is correct, whereas the “alone” addition is not; and I agree with you but Lutherans wouldn’t.)

 

[KenEOTE]

I enjoyed this thread. I find it interesting that over here the Catholics are calling the protestants heretics and over on another forum the Protestants are calling the Catholics Heretics. Its good to see that both sides have people who like to be Pharisees.

 

[TriuneUnity]

So why is that surprising? You can also find Catholic blog that claim that all non-Catholics are going to hell.

I basically agree with you, being a Catholic myself; but lest we be unfair to the Lutherans, I would point out that Catholics added the word “filioque” to the Creed – and haven’t removed it. (I know you’ll say that’s different because the “filioque” addition is correct, whereas the “alone” addition is not; and I agree with you but Lutherans wouldn’t.)

Since all translation of Greek is exactly that, a translation, not a word for word dictation, one always translates the meaning of the Greek, not word for word. Justified by faith apart from works/Justified apart from everything but faith/Justified by faith alone. All convey the meaning of the Greek.

Luther was not the first commentator or translator to use “alone” in Rom. 3:28. Add Augustine and Chrysostom to that list.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Did I miss it when Rome said that those born into Protestant churches or those that are Protestant through no fault of their own are not guilty of heresy?

You didn’t miss it. It was just ignored by the James White version of Roman Catholics here at CAF. Oh, and they also “interpreted” it. Something that shouldn’t be done with Church teaching…

 

[Dauphin]

I enjoyed this thread. I find it interesting that over here the Catholics are calling the protestants heretics and over on another forum the Protestants are calling the Catholics Heretics. Its good to see that both sides have people who like to be Pharisees.

And I suppose the Biblical figures and Fathers of the Church who called people heretics were pharisees as well? Was Christ a pharisee for suggesting that some people will be damned?

“You’re a pharisee” has to be the most misused allegation on these forums. Most people clearly have no idea what a pharisee was.

 

[Dauphin]

You didn’t miss it. It was just ignored by the James White version of Roman Catholics here at CAF. Oh, and they also “interpreted” it. Something that shouldn’t be done with Church teaching…

If there is any interpretation to be done, as there clearly is with the Catechism, then it must be done in light of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

 

[ralphinal]

The only circumstances under which one is not expected to know Catholic doctrine is if one is in a state of invincible ignorance.

If the ignorance is only vincible, then the person will be damned if he does not come to know and accept the Catholic faith. The formal rejection called heresy is not necessary for damnation. Ignorance isn’t a ticket to heaven.

The vast majority, I’d expect.

Well, we agree on this. So, how do we know who is what? Do we assume that everyone can and should know? Or should we try to teach with charity and hope for the best? Or should we assume that those who hold the most harsh positions are heretics and lost causes and just write them off?

 

[Peter_J]

Luther was not the first commentator or translator to use “alone” in Rom. 3:28. Add Augustine and Chrysostom to that list.

Can you provide a source for that claim? (Preferably online. )

 

[Dauphin]

Well, we agree on this. So, how do we know who is what? Do we assume that everyone can and should know? Or should we try to teach with charity and hope for the best? Or should we assume that those who hold the most harsh positions are heretics and lost causes and just write them off?

That one.

 

[ralphinal]

That one.

Ok.

What exactly does it mean to teach in charity?

 

[Dauphin]

Ok.

What exactly does it mean to teach in charity?

The definition of charity is to love another enough to hope genuinely for their salvation. Often, charity involves admonition of the sinner. It’s not all about “being nice”.

Given the Church’s dogmatic teaching on salvation, it is charitable to warn non-Catholics that they will not be saved if they remain outside the Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[ralphinal]

The definition of charity is to love another enough to hope genuinely for their salvation. Often, charity involves admonition of the sinner. It’s not all about “being nice”.

Given the Church’s dogmatic teaching on salvation, it is charitable to warn non-Catholics that they will not be saved if they remain outside the Catholic and Apostolic Church.

I agree that we should admonish the sinner. Sometimes, we cannot be as nice. That does not mean that we should not be polite.

Yes, we should instruct others as to why they should join the Catholic Church. However, many on this thread take the “Get with us or go to hell” approach. We cannot say who is in what state as far as ability to accept the truth. That said, we can all do a better job. We should all start with preaching the Gospel constantly and if needed use words (St. Francis). Not everyone is outside the Church by their own choice.

 

[Dauphin]

I agree that we should admonish the sinner. Sometimes, we cannot be as nice. That does not mean that we should not be polite.

Yes, we should instruct others as to why they should join the Catholic Church. However, many on this thread take the “Get with us or go to hell” approach. We cannot say who is in what state as far as ability to accept the truth. That said, we can all do a better job. We should all start with preaching the Gospel constantly and if needed use words (St. Francis). Not everyone is outside the Church by their own choice.

I’m of the opinion that the Church has applied far too much of the “medicine of mercy” for far too long.

A nice healthy dose of fire and brimstone is what our “Protestant brethren” desperately need, and I’m more than happy to provide it.